Case 2400041/2021 · Employment Tribunal
The Personal Representative of Mr Peter Ball (Deceased) and/or The Executors of the Estate of Mr Peter Ball (Deceased) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Custom — 2023
- Case reference
- 2400041/2021
- Decision date
- 9 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Slater Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
The Personal Representative of Mr Peter Ball (Deceased) and/or The Executors of the Estate of Mr Peter Ball (Deceased)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 20 September 2023, the Tribunal wrote to the claimant's personal representatives or executors and gave them an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out. The Tribunal recorded that it had been reliably informed that the claimant was deceased, that there had been no contact from the personal representatives or executors, and that there had been no reply to the Tribunal's letter of 29 March 2023 about whether the claim should continue.
The Tribunal also recorded that it had no further or alternative means of contacting the personal representatives or executors beyond the claimant's last known postal address, and that the claim did not appear to be actively pursued. No written representations were made, and no hearing was requested in response to the 20 September 2023 letter.
The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim. The judgment does not record any substantive findings on the merits of the underlying complaint and does not award any remedy.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The extracted judgment text does not restate the substantive complaint, but the case listing identifies disability discrimination; the judgment itself only records strike out for non-pursuit. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.